Posted on 07/29/2008 4:39:52 PM PDT by annalex
Evangelicals have been going through a major change of heart in their view of Catholicism over the past 15 years or so. In the 80’s when I was in college I lived in the Biblebelt and had plenty of experience with Evangelicals–much of it bad experience. The 80’s was the height of the “Are you saved?” question. In Virginia, the question often popped up in the first 10 minutes of getting to know someone. As I look back, Isurmise that this was coached from the pulpit or Sunday school as it was so well coordinated and almost universally applied. It was a good tactic for putting Catholics on the defensive even before it was known that they were Catholic—”ummmm, uhhh, well no, I’m not sure, I’m Catholic.” Then a conversation about works righteousness or saint statues would ensue. Yeah, nice to meet you, too.
Thankfully, those days are pretty much over. We now have formerly rabid anti-Catholics apologizing and even praising the pope. Catholics and Evangelicals have both learned that we have much in common and need each other to face the secular culture with a solid front. But, where did this detente come from? I think there is a real history to be told here and a book should be written. Let me give my perceptions of 7 major developments since 1993, which I regard as the the watershed year for the renewal of the Catholic Church in the United States.
1. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1993. When this document came out, it was uncertain that even Catholics would read it. We should have known that something was up when the French version hit the top of the bestsellers charts in France and stayed there for months. The English version did the same in the US. Catholics were reading the Catechism, forming study groups and challenging errant professors in the classroom.
2. World Youth Day, Denver 1993. Catholic youth and youth ministers woke up. Suddenly, Catholic youth ministers realized that the youth loved the pope. And they loved him all the more because he did not talk down to them or water down the faith. He challenged them. Gone now were the pizza and a video parish youth nights. Furthermore, youth and young adults took up the challenge to evangelize. One of those youth heard the message and started a website, New Advent. Catholic youth were now becoming zealous for the Catholic faith in its fullness and were not going to be swayed by an awkward conversation that began with “Are you saved?”
3. Scott Hahn. While the Catechism is great for expounding the Catholic faith, it is not a work of apologetics itself. It is not written to expose the flaws of Evangelical theology. It is not written to defend the Church against the attacks of Evangelicals per se. It just would not let them get away with misrepresenting the Catholic faith. But Scott Hahn hit the scene at about the same time with Rome Sweet Home: Our Journey to Catholicism (Ignatius Press: San Francisco, 1993). I first heard his testimony on cassette tape in 1996. It blew my mind. Suddenly, Catholic apologetics, which is as old as the Catholic Church itself, got a leg up and there was an explosion of books, magazines and websites that effectively undercut the arguments of the 5 Solas. For the first time, there was a cadre of Catholics well enough informed to defend their faith.
4. The Internet. The Net started exploding from 1993 to 1996. I had my first account in ‘94. Compuserve was horribly basic, but by ‘96 I had AOL and the religion debates raged instantly. Catholics who had just been given the most powerful weapon in the arsenal in the war against misinterpretation of their teaching were learning to type on a forum while balancing their catechisms on their laps. Of course, online versions came out, as well. But, no Evangelical bent on getting Catholics out of the arms of the Whore of Babylon could expect to do so without himself have a copy of the Catechism, knowing it inside out and pouring over it for the errors and horrors he would surely find. Evangelical apologists were confronted with a coherent and beautiful presentation of the Catholic faith that they were ill equipped to argue against. They learned that Catholics, too, loved Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. The Catechism had arrived providentially just before the internet and had turned the tables in just a few short years. With the apologetic movement hitting at the same time, Evangelicals were also confronted with Catholics who could argue from the Bible defending their faith and demonstrating the weaknesses of Evangelical interpretations of scripture.
5. Early Church Fathers. One fruit of the Apologetics movement has been a flowering anew of Catholic interest in Patristics. This is happening at every level from armchair apologists to doctoral studies. It is suddenly all about Patristics, whereas in the 70’s-90’s the academic focus had been on Karl Rahner and Liberation Theology.
6. Evangelical Third World Experience. Evangelicals have had a field day in Latin America among the poor who are not part of the internet conversation and are distant from the study of apologetics. But, Evangelicals have learned from their experiences abroad an essential aspect of the Gospel they were missing: the Works of Mercy. Once haughty with their criticism of “works righteousness,” they have learned one cannot attend to the spiritual needs of the poor without attending to their bodily needs. Catholic have always understood this. Now, the Evangelicals are coming around. I haven’t heard an Evangelical Televangelist speak on works righteousness in many years.
7. Secularism. With the collapse of the Mainline churches as the backbone of American religion over the past thirty years (since about 1975), Catholics and Evangelicals are the only ones left standing in this country to present the Gospel. Secularism is on the rise and is ruthless. Evangelicals are now learning that only Catholicism has the intellectual resources to combat the present secular age. And, with the pope, we have a pretty effective means for communicating the faith and representing it to the world. There is nothing an Evangelical can do that will match the power of one World Youth Day.
With such an array of Providential developments, Evangelicals as well as Catholics have come to appreciate the depth and the breadth of the Catholic faith. It is far more difficult for them to honestly dismiss Catholicism as the work of Satan as once they did without qualm. There have been apologies and there have been calls for a new partnership. Let us hope these developments will bring about a new moment of understanding for the Glory of the Lord.
To Rome it means we heretics are to submit to the Pope.
Yep. By the grace of God alone, we strive for the former in order to bring more glory to His name.
Here it is in total:
"On the 30th of April, 1922, in the Vatican Throne Room, a throng of Cardinals, Bishops, Priests, and Nuns, boys and girls, who all fell on their knees, were addressed fromthe Throne by Pope Pius XI., who, in a haughty tone, said: 'You know that I am the Holy Father, the representative of God on the earth, the Vicar of Christ, which means that I am God on the earth.'" (Quoted from "The Bulwark", October, 1922, reporting on the speach which was heard by those attending, including some reporters.)
I have many more quotes made by various popes over the years that are very pointed and self-condemning. Perhaps I should post them? I am sure they will not be received very well by the RC's on board :-)
Somebody wake up the Reformation secretary and have him or her commit to pen and ink for all posterity Annalex's "ecumenical" desire.
It certainly shows us who's drawing lines and taking up arms.
Why then should we be surprised Ratzinger denies we worship God in our churches and instead tells us our churches are merely social gatherings and perfunctory business meetings unattended by the Holy Spirit?
"The more brightly the light of doctrine shines, so as to press more closely on wicked men, they are driven to a greater pitch of madness." -- John Calvin, The Institutes"Nothing that is attempted in opposition to God can ever be successful"
In case anyone's wondering whether FRCatholics are actually advocating violence against the Catholic Church's "enemies" - meet the new Inquisition.
This is an "open" thread in the Religion Forum. The debate here is like a town square. Religious figures, deities and beliefs will be challenged.
Thin-skinned posters are disruptors on "open" threads.
Leave the thread.
Your "opinion"??? I thought we were discussing evidence? Are we now discussing your opinions? If so, your opinion is based on what?
Are you trying to change the topic? I form my opinion from the evidence presented.
As to the opinions of "many others"...who are these others? Dollinger is cited most liberally by protestant apologists/others (e.g. Hunt, Webster, De Rosa) who have written on this subject of the False Decretals. Dollinger, in all probability is *the* ultimate source in question in your post on this topic; yet he says they were NOT written with this purpose in mind. Who is your "history scholar" who says otherwise and based on what?
The "others", as you ask, are those who likewise form their opinions on the evidence presented. I have no idea what "Hunt, Webster, De Rosa" have said, and have no intention of looking up what they said. While Dollinger, a real scholar, a former Roman Catholic apologist, is often quoted, he is far from being the "ultimate" origin of "most" quotes. In fact, most of the quotes I have been able to substantiate are from Roman Catholic sources.
For example, Archbishop Bagshawe did not hesitate to say: "There is no Christianity outside of the Catholic Church"; so also states Pius X's Catechism, thus placing Christianity inside a colossal lie.
Again: Concerning the "Donation of Constantine" which was concocted at Rome, based on the earlier fifth century legend, whereby the Pope is described as Lord and master of all Bishops, and having authority over the four "thrones of Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople, Jerusalem; and as having receied Italy and the Western Provinces from the Emperor. It is upon this forgery that the Pope's claim to territorial power rested. The earliest reference to this pretended gift of Constantine occurs in Pope Adrian's letter to Charlemagne in AD 777; though Popes had, since AD 752, spoken of "restitution" of Italian towns and provinces to St. Peter or to the Roman Republic. Twenty years later, 797 AD, the need was felt at Rome of a more extensive invention. So a document was laid before Charlemagne in Rome, professing to be his father Pepin's "gift" or "promise" of territory to the Pope. This forgery assigned all Corsica, Venetia, Istria, Luni, Moselica, Parma, reggio, Mantua, and the Duchies of Spoleto and Benevento, and the Exarchate of Ravenna to the Pope. (Liber Pontificalis, II., 193, Vignol edition.)
Again: There have unquestionably been some falsification in privileges granted to Popes by Emperors later than Charlemagn - such as the "pact" of Lois the Pious, in AD 817 - an interpolation of the eleventh century. So, again, with the privileges of the Emperors, Otho I, in 962, an henry II in 1020. All kinds of the other forgeries are traceable to Rome. As "Acts of Martyrs" had been fabricated there earlier, so from the tenth century, false documents were fabricatd wholesale at Rome. (Le Grotte Vaticane, Roma, 1639, pp. 505-510; Jaffe, Regesta, p. 936.)
The most potent instrument of Papal machination was Gratian's "Decretum," issued in the twelfth century, from Bologna. In this the Isidorian forgeries were combined with other Gregorian writers' fabrications, as well as with Gratian's own. This work displaced all older collections of Canon Law, and became the fount of knowledge for all "sholastic theologians"! Forgery was herein added to forgery - all alike enhancing the claims of the Papacy.
I suppose I should stop now....have to go and eat a late dinner.
We know where such attitudes led several centuries ago.
Sigh.
LOL, I know who’s at the top of the list hereon for the 04:00 knock on the door!
What an honor!
Most of the Protty assertions are FAR from false accusations and have plenty of documentation.
However, we are not surprised at the fantasies by the fantasy factory about such facts.
Dollinger is NOT the source for MOST history scholars, which includes Roman Catholic history scholars. There are multitudes of other sources...many of them, rather, the great majority of them, are directly from the documents of the RCC.
= = = =
BBBBBBUT that’s NOT what the magicsterical script for RC reps says. And since they are infallible . . . believing the lies is the duty of the faithful! LOL.
PRAISE THE LORD.
thanks for your kind words.
To Rome it means we heretics are to submit to the Pope.
= = =
INDEED.
And, to my observations . . . bears more than a little resemblance to the school yard bully who sort of correctly asserts . . . MY DADDY'S BIGGER THAN YOUR DADDY AND HE'S GONNA COME OVER TO YOUR HOUSE AND STOMP YOUR DADDY BIG TIME.
Thankfully, the loss of military clout has decreased such happenings in recent centuries . . . OBVIOUSLY, to some hereon, to their keen chagrin.
I wonder how many of the rabid RC’s will sign onto the chorus of affirmations of such a declaration.
Or will they slink off to rant about some PRETEND Protty “hate” in some imaginary spot.
Good grief! Those posts are despicable -- Catholics advocating violence against those who question Rome.
The more things change, the more they stay the same. "Meet the new boss; same as the old boss."
Thank God, Rome is not our boss.
"The papacy...whose Baalim are angels and dead men." -- Calvin, Commentary on Jeremiah
Or that the FR Religion forum is not reflective of the Christendom as a whole.
Equating a carnal, flesh driven, archaic, toothpick-shard-foundationed, !!!!TRADITIONS-OF-MAN-BOUND!!!!, authoritarian, political-power-mongerer led, bureaucratic, committee led
edifice, institution
—EQUATING THAT—with
GOD
in authority, priority, clout, . . .
is horrific blasphemy of near the worst order.
There were very real doctrinal differences between the Church of Rome and the Church of England. These included (but were not limited to):
NOT
issuing thinly veiled suggestions that violence against assertive Prottys is a matter of 'holy duty?'
I suppose we Prottys should take comfort in that. Weak comfort, but comfort, nevertheless.
For my part . . . I'm wondering if I need to ask potential members of a local FR regional club how rabid are their RC sensibilities and priorities . . . in order to know whether it's safe to attend with such folks, or not.
And when the globalist gestapo begins the 04:00 roundups . . . will the tipsters against the Prottys be the 5-10% of the rabid RC's trying to insure that Prottys get their RC declared and judged 'just due?'
Interesting thoughts I'd rather not have been provoked into pondering.
Ratzinger's condemnation of my church reflects not on me, but on him and all who blindly look upon him as "another Christ."
For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be ondemned." -- Matthew 12:36-37"But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
SOME Anglicans may have decided this later, but it certainly wasn't the case at the time of the English Reformation.
The church of Rome held that the bread and wine become literally and physically the body and blood of Christ. The church of England held that bread and wine remain bread and wine.
False.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.